Joe D. I run with an i5 at 3.2 and 8GB of memory and I have the same experience - big scenarios, lots of units, the counter slows, sometimes 'stutters' (and freezes) whilst it thinks. It never gets so slow though that a 1:1 ratio (1 minute game time is 1 real minute) is actually achieved! It's always a bit faster than that on slowest setting. So not that bad (though I recall calling for an 'enforce real time' option once, I do think that would be a bit dull). Like you said, I think there's a lot going on. Since we've seen recently that the RAM used doesn't ever go much beyond 100MB I assume that many of the calculations have some kind of bottleneck effect, and get a bit clogged even though you have plenty memory left. Though I wouldn't have a clue, because I have no idea how these machines work, really.

that's roughly the figure for the Battle of the Roadblocks scenario, following from Ramses' savegame. The memory footprint of Command Ops is about 130MBytes for an scenario like that, having tasks set for most of the commands.

You can expect that figure to be higher in scenarios with more commands (or where you're micro-managing a lot, detaching many units from their HHQ's).

As Phoenix says: the name of the game for Command Ops isn't as much memory as CPU time. It's extremely intensive.

Maybe Dave or Paul might want to comment on their plans. But exploiting obvious resources - such as multi-core CPU's, GPU's, etc. - are major engineering problems. No "cheap and cheerful" solutions here, mate. It's more like winning We Fight and Die Here scenario with the Axis (good luck with that buddies ).

There are 3 areas where I would like to see improvements in performance:

1. Route finding - the fundamental code for this has not change in years, I'm sure we could do things better now. 2. Line of Site - consumes about as much time as route finding, especcailly when there are lots of units, again a while since we visited this last. 3. Threading - There is only one AI thread, more units, slower game, does ot matter how many cores you have, game is threaded but more than 2 cores does not help much.

No 3 looks like being my next big job, we are looking at diving the AI thread into 2 one per side. Stepping stone to having one per command, with multiple commands per side.

A Pentium dual core with 2Gb RAM is not much these days performance wise but it should be adequate. Also be aware that if you have the autosave option turned on, it does a save every 5 minutes and there will be a slight pause while this occurs.

I turned Autosave off for the Roadblock Battle, but haven't tried it off with a larger scenario; I did notice the game seemed to stall whenever daylight was adjusted on the screen.

Win XP Pent (R) D CPU 2.8 GHz 2 GB RAM

< Message edited by Joe D. -- 2/28/2013 10:49:34 AM >

_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U The best fighter-bomber of World War II

Daylight adjustments shouldn't slow things down but hemorning resupply event that occurs at 0600 and the corresponding evening one at 1800 could result in a pause while ti does all those resupply routes.

If I had something worthwhile to send him I would..my PC is barely mid range. The only spare I have is a ATI 4870 card which is long in the tooth but still a fast card. Infact the 6850 card I have now was a big disappointment and it's the first time a new card has let me down. I barely see any speed difference between the 4870 and the 6850. I hear aswell there will be no new ATI cards this year which means no price drops.

Someone has to;) it's the implications of Win 8 thats worrying. The slow move towards a closed platform, which will take away the best thing about the PC..it being an open platform. A fair few developers aren't that keen and they are the ones I listen too.

Yeh like does it overcome the dreadfull Iterator Debugging issue where if the option is turned off you can't see strings in the debugger and if it's turned on you can see strings and hence read the names of objects, which is pretty useful, but alas the application runs as slow as treacle.

Using the latest patch and playing Cracking the Goose Egg as Germans. I have several unattached arty and neb batteries near Wallmerath. I'm trying to consolidate commands, so I try to loop 6 of them together, so I can better concentrate their fire. Every time I loop them together and try to issue a Defend order, the game crashes to desktop. Every time (tried 12). Do you need a save game or is this something of which you are aware?

Someone has to;) it's the implications of Win 8 thats worrying. The slow move towards a closed platform, which will take away the best thing about the PC..it being an open platform. A fair few developers aren't that keen and they are the ones I listen too.

Ah Gabe, perhaps you are listening to the wrong people. Win8 is a superior OS to Win7: why wouldn't you use it. The developer debate is bunkum; the desktop, and games (like CmdOps) that run there, will not be closed.

TANX

_____________________________

I decided to ignore my orders and to take command at the front with my own hands as soon as possible - Lieutenant General Erwin Rommel

Using the latest patch and playing Cracking the Goose Egg as Germans. I have several unattached arty and neb batteries near Wallmerath. I'm trying to consolidate commands, so I try to loop 6 of them together, so I can better concentrate their fire. Every time I loop them together and try to issue a Defend order, the game crashes to desktop. Every time (tried 12). Do you need a save game or is this something of which you are aware?

Not Just Gabe..even Iain if I remember isn't keen. Notch is another. Jim who develops and runs RPS another. Win7 is stable and designed for the PC a superb OS that was easy good enough. Win 8 was designed for tablets..no more need be said.

Not Just Gabe..even Iain if I remember isn't keen. Notch is another. Jim who develops and runs RPS another. Win7 is stable and designed for the PC a superb OS that was easy good enough. Win 8 was designed for tablets..no more need be said.

And you've used it loads? Those guys are just worried there revenues might be affected, I say FUD. The UI WAS perhaps partly designed for tablets. I hardly ever use the "metro" side (apart form on my Surface). you 'll be crying "no start button" next...never used it in Win98, XP, Vista, 7: the win-key is the future. If you used Win8 you could try win-key and start typing the name of the app you are looking for...it just works.

Oh, and CmdOps runs quite a bit BETTER on Win8, and to be quite honest, that IS the most important thing.

_____________________________

I decided to ignore my orders and to take command at the front with my own hands as soon as possible - Lieutenant General Erwin Rommel

In fact I hate it so much I've gone and bought an ipad and a Chrome book and two windows 7 netbooks (only 179.99 from Argos and includes Word and Excel). I'll have to stick to win 8 for my games but microsoft has really pissed me off with this purple tablet flashing squares and millions of app boxes in an unco-ordinated mess. Fortunately my main work laptop is Win 7 and I'll archive the netbooks until I need them.

Didn't microsoft get rid of the bloke responsible for win 8 - sodoffsky or somesuch. ?

It seems to happen often when dragging an artillery fire order to a new location, or especially when pressing delete key to cancel the order.

I have a save that a crash will happen soon after, but still can't replicate the exact sequence for it to happen, but soon after the save, within a game hour of giving normal orders it will crash at some point. Let me know if you want it sent.

I'm going to revert back to the released version until you have the next beta ready, as its getting a bit annoying.

Thanks for you excellent on going support, for this amazing game Dave.

I did a get on Miquel's fixes to the UI this evening. They all compiled OK and I've just finished a test of the tutorial issuing orders aplenty for the first two days. I had no crashes....it's looking good. So a new build won't be far away.